Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-31-Speech-4-116"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010531.3.4-116"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Following the discussions which led to this report, my group helped to improve the Commission’s proposal, by means of amendments which were legally sound, progressive, in the spirit of the Treaty of Amsterdam and in line with the directive, and which, above all, would not lead to any increase in bureaucracy for employers, Unfortunately, in spite of compromises, with which we were largely in agreement, the rapporteur and other groups, without consulting us, introduced further amendments which called the compromises into question and which culminated in the tabling of a so-called Compromise Amendment No 70.
On this point, I should like to point out that, while I agree with the idea that one should not discriminate against fathers either, the members of my group were unable to vote in favour of this amendment because there will always be a difference between ‘maternity’ and ‘paternity’. Unless the present order of things changes, men cannot become pregnant and cannot, therefore, give birth. Moreover, this amendment is something of a muddle, so that those of us who like good, solid, legal texts cannot agree to it.
As far as the final voting is concerned, many of us were unable to vote in favour of the report because, against our wishes, amendments such as Amendments Nos 4, 36 and 44 were adopted. As the Commissioner has said, they are unacceptable because they ignore the most basic procedures, and in particular the provisions of the Treaty. If this Parliament is a co-legislator, it should not confuse a legislative text with a resolution, in which one can reveal all kinds of wishful thinking. A legislative text must be capable of implementation. Let us not forget, either, that in seeking to give women at work all-round protection, we run the risk of impairing and endangering their access to employment and their chances of promotion. Please, let us stop getting so worked up over sexual harassment, and finally, in this area as in others, let us not ignore the principle of subsidiarity.
These are the reasons why many of the members of my group were unable to vote in favour of this report. I await the second reading, and I hope that the wisdom of the Council will be brought to bear on the irrational proposals which we have adopted."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples